News Article: Iiro Pakarinen about his time as an Oiler, journalist relates to Puljujärvi (Finnish media)

Daryls Friend

Registered User
May 14, 2017
3,068
3,306
This article is the embodiment of why some players young or old are lost in some organizations and find their game and succeed in others. Every organization of any kind thrives on development of talent and sinks due to a lack there of. Doesnt matter whether theyre veterans they can still be coached coaches and improved you don't just forget how to learn and develop at age 27. If this is actually staff distancing themselves from players to make tough decisions easier theyre cowards and flat out shouldn't have a job. Hall, Auvitu, Pak, etc have all had similar experiences.

I don't think these players magically lose talent and they had to get there some how. It's how they're handled. I have no doubt that the handling of Jesse has been a joke like we think it has and I don't really blame him for how he's played thus far.
NHL drafts (and every league under the sun, and at every level) are littered with kids who for one reason or another quit progressing. They were good and then they were not. It could be that they were able to dominate at a younger age because they were physically superior, faster, smarter, whateverBut at some point you max out.Some guys max out earlier, some later. And if you have maxed out or at least stop progressing at the same pace with whomever your elite peer group is, you are screwed. And thats what I suspect has happened to JP. Because to me, he has shown nothing, & I mean nothing, that is elite .
 
  • Like
Reactions: RegDunlop

McSuper

5-14-6-1
Jun 16, 2012
16,943
6,571
Halifax
The NHL isn't a development league. Guys like Pakarainen sit because they aren't good enough. Why would the coach waste their time telling a player sorry the other guys are better. Obviously, there are some young players in the league still developing, and those players most likely get more communication. Puljujarvi spent some of the time in his games off watching the game with Viveiros for example.

It is how you get players to buy into your system . Pretty simple to go to a player and say hey I am sitting you for a few games . You need to work on these things . You missed this coverage in the defensive zone twice . You got to remember cover your man and no matter what stay with him . Also you need to make sure the puck is deep before coming to the bench .
 
  • Like
Reactions: elmaco and Aerrol

Aerrol

༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ
Sep 18, 2014
6,555
3,208
The NHL isn't a development league. Guys like Pakarainen sit because they aren't good enough. Why would the coach waste their time telling a player sorry the other guys are better. Obviously, there are some young players in the league still developing, and those players most likely get more communication. Puljujarvi spent some of the time in his games off watching the game with Viveiros for example.

Gee, I dunno, maybe because getting the most out of your players (i.e. DEVELOPING THEM) makes for a stronger team? Crazy idea, I know.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TB12

ToeMcDrag83

5-14-6-1
Aug 25, 2010
4,320
2,603
Oil Country
Tactics like this lose the room eventually. When doubt creeps in to your game or season (e.g. a 3 game losing streak) you look to your leaders for answers. Hard to find any if the main on-ice honcho doesn't communicate anything.

Article also mention Joe Thornton making similar comments during Todd's tenure in San Jose. Not an adaptable coach.
 

Burnt Biscuits

Registered User
May 2, 2010
9,164
3,179
I've heard similar complaints with Quenneville not telling guys why they are sitting, yet no one bad mouths his coaching ability. I'd be concerned if there wasn't a dialogue with someone like Pulju as he has things he needs to improve and he badly needs some direction, but not telling Pakarinen why he is sitting isn't a big deal at all. Pakarinen was in his mid-20's and simply wasn't contributing enough offensively it's not hard to figure out. The coach praised Pakarinen in the media many times over his consistency and doing many of the finer details correctly, if you can't tell the missing ingredient you got rocks for brains.
 

CycloneSweep

Registered User
Sep 27, 2017
47,831
39,718
I've heard similar complaints with Quenneville not telling guys why they are sitting, yet no one bad mouths his coaching ability. I'd be concerned if there wasn't a dialogue with someone like Pulju as he has things he needs to improve and he badly needs some direction, but not telling Pakarinen why he is sitting isn't a big deal at all. Pakarinen was in his mid-20's and simply wasn't contributing enough offensively it's not hard to figure out. The coach praised Pakarinen in the media many times over his consistency and doing many of the finer details correctly, if you can't tell the missing ingredient you got rocks for brains.
I've heard a lot of coaching staffs the head coach keeps his distance and the assistants are the guys communicating. They are kind of like the supervisors and the head coach is the manager. Supervisors are usually the ones discussing things with employees for the most part.
 

elmaco

Registered User
Feb 1, 2017
1,948
1,032
I've heard similar complaints with Quenneville not telling guys why they are sitting, yet no one bad mouths his coaching ability. I'd be concerned if there wasn't a dialogue with someone like Pulju as he has things he needs to improve and he badly needs some direction, but not telling Pakarinen why he is sitting isn't a big deal at all. Pakarinen was in his mid-20's and simply wasn't contributing enough offensively it's not hard to figure out. The coach praised Pakarinen in the media many times over his consistency and doing many of the finer details correctly, if you can't tell the missing ingredient you got rocks for brains.
There was an article of Teuvo Teravainen giving praise to Q for benching him and telling him exactly what is what, later credits him for being a better player for it.
 

Soundwave

Registered User
Mar 1, 2007
72,141
27,826
Tactics like this lose the room eventually. When doubt creeps in to your game or season (e.g. a 3 game losing streak) you look to your leaders for answers. Hard to find any if the main on-ice honcho doesn't communicate anything.

Article also mention Joe Thornton making similar comments during Todd's tenure in San Jose. Not an adaptable coach.

That part of it is pretty damning. That said Todd generally had no problem getting the Sharks to a respectable record at least. The main problem here is the team is poorly built.
 

Aerrol

༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ
Sep 18, 2014
6,555
3,208
We seem to keep hearing this from fringe players which makes it seem like sour grapes.

Fringe players, Hall, Eberle, repeated failed top draft picks... But sure, no, it's the players who are wrong. Not the worst org in hockey and maybe pro sports lol.
 

CycloneSweep

Registered User
Sep 27, 2017
47,831
39,718
Fringe players, Hall, Eberle, repeated failed top draft picks... But sure, no, it's the players who are wrong. Not the worst org in hockey and maybe pro sports lol.
Hall straight up said he didn't listen to coaching staff.
 

Aerrol

༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ
Sep 18, 2014
6,555
3,208
Hall also said that Hinds was giving him feedback that he wasn't getting in Edmonton.

In any event, this method of coaching isn't exclusive to McLellan. I bet there has been a lot of coaches around the league like Quenneville, Babcock, Sutter, Hitchcock etc. who have this dinosaur way of thinking that players need to figure it out for themselves and the only coaching they need to do is drawing up strategies on a whiteboard.

Hopefully these types of coaches continue to get phased out of the league and we see more progressive thinkers with fresh ideas and open lines of communication.

What bothers me most about the Pulju situation is that they drafted him.knowing full well that he not only needed to be coached up but needed to learn the language and have a strong support staff. By many accounts, it appears that he's been alienated his entire time here and I even recall some McLellan quotes saying that Jesse needs to figure it out himself. Why even bother drafting this unpolished talent in the first place if you're not going to put in the work to bring him along?

This bothers me the most too. At the very f***ing least, if you're going to be dumb and old-school about your development strategy, DRAFT PLAYERS IT SHOULD WORK FOR. NO MORE EUROPEANS IF YOU'RE THIS STUPID. NO MORE PROJECTS. Christ.
 

Aerrol

༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ
Sep 18, 2014
6,555
3,208
Hall straight up said he didn't listen to coaching staff.

He straight up said the coaches never wanted to have any real communication and eventually the message starts to get tuned out because it was clearly not working.
But enjoy continuing to spread this lie. I've posted the quote refuting it here at least 5 times now and it's always ignored.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TB12 and RegDunlop

RegDunlop

Registered User
Nov 5, 2016
3,291
3,189
Edmonton
Yep, haha, but that's why I stated I would hire even the ghost of Q. He's a smarter dude. Even if he's plum burned out he can defer his quality ideas to the other coaching staff. At least he has them.

Q is a top echelon theoretician of the game. A professor of hockey, even. Theres always a role even as high paid advisor if he would be willing. But I would have him as figurehead coach with this group becase we have a lot of assistants that can be hands on. WE have an assistant that can run the bench.

I like Q because he found a way to transform how hockey was played. Few coaches ever are transformative.

But given how odd the firing is (the Hawks are doing better than they should) I would wonder if it was noted that Q is having problems managing the work. I would think the latter, the Hawks don't run a stupid org. Could be something wrong with Q health wise. Like there was with Pat Quinn here. Sutter is well past it too.

Well put.
I feel the same way. Not totally against if it does come to be, but at some point with this young team I want a young 'go hard new idea speed attack' coach.
 

BudBundy

Registered User
May 16, 2005
5,764
7,510
Mike Babcock says hi.
As do numerous other NHL coaches.
Pay attention

From Toronto Star report Kevin McGran:

“A great communicator. A great tactician. A winner.
And he doesn’t suffer fools.
That’s the image of Mike Babcock that emerges when talking to players and executives who have been involved with the newest head coach of the Maple Leafs.”

“He’s focused,” said Bob Nicholson, now the president of the Edmonton Oilers but formerly the head of Hockey Canada. “He’s a great communicator to the group. He communicates directly and clearly to the players. In his overall game plan he is very black and white, so everyone knows how he wants his team to play.“

Pay attention.
 

RegDunlop

Registered User
Nov 5, 2016
3,291
3,189
Edmonton
With a few exceptions NHL is the league that collects the best players from all around the world. But AFAIK almost all the coaches are from USA or Canada. I understand why that's the case, but it also means there can be some excellent coaches and good fresh ideas in other leagues too.

In fact I'd like to say the quality of coaching in the FEL is very high and while we're talking about a league with much worse players there are some things going on that maybe deserve a closer look. The quality of the coaches has also helped the national team do better than it maybe should've quite a few times.

A few FEL coaches stand above the others and there are usually some common denominators. Those coaches play modern hockey (with variation when needed), let their players learn from mistakes throughout the season, react during the games, listen to the players and develop them individually and even make sure they live and train professionally.

While I recognize the best NHL coaches are maybe the best ones in the world I believe many coaches don't get even close to maximizing their team's potential. To me McLellan's style looks egoistic, lazy or the both. It may work with a stacked team with a lot of veterans, but I don't see the current Oilers as a good fit. It may work to some extent as long as the team does well and he's got the players' respect.

Funny you mention the Finns.
Universally stated that they play a game more similar to Canadians than anyone.
Dosent surprise me then that we see coaching as a strong point as we maybe recognize some familiarity.
 

North

Registered User
Jun 25, 2009
15,693
13,295
I've heard a lot of coaching staffs the head coach keeps his distance and the assistants are the guys communicating. They are kind of like the supervisors and the head coach is the manager. Supervisors are usually the ones discussing things with employees for the most part.

That's what I've heard too. Coaches don't like getting to close to players in case they have to bring the hammer down so the assistants are meant to be the liaisons between head coach and players.
 

Quinteoilers

Registered User
Jan 7, 2012
612
24
For all the games JP has played in and watched...he should realize that most goals are scored in the slot and around the faceoff dots/circles. How many ~50’ wristers does he take?!?! He needs to reprogram himself as a hockey player.
As for the organization tough love/coddling...the Oilers could be presenting him with a “challenge” get to the net and score some “Ryan Smyth” type goals get aggressive and gritty. The player takes it like the entire organization is ripping him a new one. It’s all about perspective. No Oiler organizational staff/team mate wants him to fail.(fans included)
 

Burnt Biscuits

Registered User
May 2, 2010
9,164
3,179
There was an article of Teuvo Teravainen giving praise to Q for benching him and telling him exactly what is what, later credits him for being a better player for it.
That's good to hear, when I heard of him not communicating it was a player of similar stature to Pakarinen, a run of the mill 14th forward, Teuvo is more along the lines of Pulju being a 1st round pick, and also had some issues adjusting to the NHL.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CycloneSweep

oobga

Tier 2 Fan
Aug 1, 2003
22,936
17,813
That part of it is pretty damning. That said Todd generally had no problem getting the Sharks to a respectable record at least. The main problem here is the team is poorly built.

Give any coach a stacked lineup and they will get good regular seasons. That sharks team was a division winner before they got there and h. Unless they are Eakins-bad and try to reinvent the wheel making their players do idiotic things. He failed every year in the playoffs though getting badly out-coached, and developed a reputation of throwing his players under the bus. He probably has the NHL record for stripping players of a C in 1 coaching tenure.
 

North

Registered User
Jun 25, 2009
15,693
13,295
He straight up said the coaches never wanted to have any real communication and eventually the message starts to get tuned out because it was clearly not working.
But enjoy continuing to spread this lie. I've posted the quote refuting it here at least 5 times now and it's always ignored.

No he straight up said he didn't listen to the coaches here. He also wasn't listening to Hynes the first season in NJ. Shero had to sit him down and tell him to be a better person and a better player.

But this is not a Hall thread so no point in rehashing that stuff.
 

oobga

Tier 2 Fan
Aug 1, 2003
22,936
17,813
No he straight up said he didn't listen to the coaches here. He also wasn't listening to Hynes the first season in NJ. Shero had to sit him down and tell him to be a better person and a better player.

But this is not a Hall thread so no point in rehashing that stuff.

Catch 22 I guess for Hall here. Krueger and Nelson were probably much more collaborative coaches. Eakins and McLellan likely are very resistant to any player input because they believe they are geniuses and have all the answers already. I doubt Hall would have got anywhere trying to have dialog with McLellan. Hall seems to have only opened up by getting the 2-way deal with his coach/management, he wasn't going to just be a robot for someone. Hynes sounds like an extremely collaborative coach that is constantly looking for player input. Good for him, and that probably made it a lot easier for Hall to finally grow up a bit as a leader with his team.
 

North

Registered User
Jun 25, 2009
15,693
13,295
Catch 22 I guess for Hall here. Krueger and Nelson were probably much more collaborative coaches. Eakins and McLellan likely are very resistant to any player input because they believe they are geniuses and have all the answers already. I doubt Hall would have got anywhere trying to have dialog with McLellan. Hall seems to have only opened up by getting the 2-way deal with his coach/management, he wasn't going to just be a robot for someone. Hynes sounds like an extremely collaborative coach that is constantly looking for player input. Good for him, and that probably made it a lot easier for Hall to finally grow up a bit as a leader with his team.

Only after Shero sat him down.

Ultimately I think they need someone who is more communicative here because it's a young team with a lot of players still learning different aspects of the game.

A coach who doesn't provide feedback is of little use to this team.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->